Moms across the U.S. are sharing similar struggles, highlighting the systemic failures in family and child care policy. Stories from Sweden, Norway, Canada, and Portugal show alternatives where child care is affordable and supportive of parents.
by Brea Harris OtherWords
At three months old, my son was kicked out of his daycare.
I had spent my pregnancy navigating my city’s brutal child care landscape — posting on social media looking for nanny shares, adding my name to year-long waitlists, and wondering how I was going to pay the astronomical daycare fees.
So when I found this place, I felt a flood of relief. It was close to my job, half the cost of others in the area, and had a gold star recommendation from a friend of a friend. It seemed like a unicorn amidst daycares. It seemed like the perfect fit.
Yet less than a week after I returned to work, I received a call asking me to pick up my son because he was crying too much. The next day, same call. After a few days I was told “it was not a good fit.” I had until the end of the month.
I quickly learned that I’m not alone. Almost every mom I know has a story like this.
I had exhausted my PTO and depleted my savings in an attempt to offset the costs of my unpaid leave. I don’t have family nearby. I’m a single mom working in healthcare unable to work remotely or stay home full time. And I had no idea where I was going to send my three month old son during the day while I worked.
I sent out desperate pleas to mom groups in my area and eventually, through the power of the moms in my community, I found the daycare he now attends.
I love this daycare. However, it costs more than my rent — it puts a $1,600 deficit in my monthly budget. So with each passing month I fall further behind on car payments, student loans, utilities. And every day I field calls from debt collectors.
All of this is due to the cost of child care.
It was moms that helped me secure a last minute daycare spot.
When I started sharing my story with friends, coworkers, and random moms on the playground, I quickly learned that I’m not alone. Almost every mom I know has a story like this. They’ve been juggling budget deficits to afford care, pleading for financial aid, adding their names to yearlong wait lists, reducing their work hours, or cutting their careers short.
The details vary, but the common thread is this: Child care costs are unsustainable.
This late night rabbit hole affirmed what I already knew in my gut: moms in the U.S. are struggling due to systemic issues and policy failures. And it does not have to be this way.
In my 13 months of motherhood, I’ve already witnessed the power moms have when we band together. It was moms that helped me secure a last minute daycare spot. It was moms who recently gathered at a local park to swap baby gear in response to rising prices.
And it will be moms who demand more from our policymakers when it comes to the accessibility of child care in our country.
Dear Editor,
Let’s talk about this fun-police-mandated word “allowed.” Allowed by whom? By the same paragons of virtue crowd that burned women alive for being “too smart”? By the ones who outlawed women from reading, voting, and owning property because it threatened, bruised, and fractured their fragile egos? The same people who still panic and experience a total neurological meltdown when a woman dares to sit at the head of a boardroom table? Oh, yes—thank you, mighty overlords, for your generous crumbs of liberty.
But here’s the delightful irony: women were ruling empires from golden thrones and commanding vast armies while men were still drawing stick figures in caves. Women birthed nations—literally—while men wrote laws deciding if those same women could even own their own bodies. Women ran revolutions, resisted oppression, and rebuilt entire societies while men stood around acting like referees of existence, blowing their whistle: “Okay, fine, you’re allowed now. Don’t get too cocky.”
Too cocky? Sweetheart, women don’t need cocky—they’ve got capable. And capable terrifies you. Let’s correct the narrative, shall we? Women have been running kingdoms, civilizations, households, revolutions, and movements long before anyone scribbled the word “allowed” onto their lips. Cleopatra didn’t wait for a consent slip or a committee’s approval. Joan of Arc didn’t ask if it was “okay” to lead an army. Rosa Parks didn’t sit on that bus thinking, “Gee, I hope the men let me do this.”
Hatshepsut declared herself Pharaoh and ruled Egypt with unparalleled prosperity. Boudicca led a massive rebellion against the Roman Empire. Tomoe Gozen was a legendary samurai warrior, respected for her skill and ferocity long before any man dared to diminish her glory.
Artemisia I of Caria, the brilliant naval commander who fought for Xerxes at Salamis, whose strategic advice was so valued by the Persian king that he reportedly said, “My men have become women, and my women, men.”
Yet somehow, today, in the year where we pretend to be “progressive,” the phrase “women are allowed” still gets thrown around like a consolation prize. Allowed to work. Allowed to inherit. Allowed to drive. Allowed to speak. Do you hear the ridiculousness? It’s like saying, “You’re allowed to eat, but only if we feel generous.”
The next time “allowed” is uttered, remember: women decide. They don’t negotiate for power. They take it.
Yumna Zahid Ali Karachi, Pakistan
Yumna Zahid Ali is a writer and educator who spends her free time reading, analyzing literature, and exploring cultural and intellectual debates. When she’s not writing for global audiences, she enjoys reflecting on societal issues and using her voice to challenge inequities, especially those affecting women. She also loves diving into history, believing that remembering the past is an act of defiance and a way to hold power accountable.
TAGS: Women empowerment, feminism, gender equality, social commentary, Yumna Zahid Ali
The First Amendment ensures speech, not paychecks. From TV hosts to pastors, free expression at work often collides with financial realities.
The first amendment protects our free speech but employers will protect their bottom line.
However, to some extent, there are some limitations and barriers for all of us. When he began his career, national radio personality Howard Stern couldn’t keep a job. His content was so raw and shocking that station owners and managers couldn’t afford to keep him on because advertisers couldn’t afford to risk supporting him. Things changed. He eventually became acceptable to enough listeners that he was hugely profitable. A massive contract with Sirius XM radio gave him a huge audience, allowed him to say whatever he wanted and paid him handsomely. Since 2004, they have paid him hundreds of millions of dollars. His employer found him to be profitable and accepted by many.
Stearns’ contract recently expired and his deal hasn’t been renewed. The renewal won’t be based on Stearns’ freedom of speech but it will be based on whether he will be profitable for Sirius XM radio which means he probably won’t be returning.
Glenn Mollette
Jimmy Kimmel is off the air, for now. He has been making a nice $15M a year salary from the Disney corporation who owns ABC and the ESPN network as well. He has had a nice job with them for 20 years and come out five nights a week saying whatever he wanted to say. After some recent comments made about Charlie Kirk that have been replayed numerous times on national TV, Disney decided to take his show down for a while, possibly forever.
Stations across the country let it be known to Disney they weren’t going to air Kimmel’s show after his remarks about Kirk and Disney listened. It was about money. Disney is in the business to make money, big money. The Stephen Colbert show was losing $40M a year and Colbert’s show had better ratings than Kimmel. The idea of losing millions of dollars on Kimmel was unacceptable to Disney. If TV station chains, cable companies and local stations around the country had applauded Kimmel, if ratings and profitability had soared, Disney would have kept Kimmel on.
No employer is going to keep you on the payroll if your mouth is bankrupting the business. You may have the right to speak but you may be speaking on the street corner somewhere without a paycheck if the employer doesn’t like what you are saying.
The minister of your local church may have the freedom to preach the Bible. Yet, he or she could find themselves unemployed if they ruffle enough feathers of the congregation’s leadership. A politician may speak freely but only has a job if he or she can sway enough voters. You can walk into wherever you work and say whatever you want about the company or your boss. Most likely, you’ll end up in the unemployment line. Plus, you will not be able to obtain a reference or recommendation for your next interview.
Yes, we have freedom of speech but it has limitations and consequences. Charlie Kirk was his own employer. That seems to be about the only way you can really pull off free speech. He said just about whatever he wanted and there wasn’t anyone to fire him, so someone killed him. Sadly, Charlie Kirk’s free speech cost him his life.
There is almost always a price to be paid for freedom of speech. It is important and it is American, but your employer doesn’t have to agree with you or keep you on the payroll.
About the author ~
Glen Mollett is the author of 13 books including Uncommom Sense, the Spiritual Chocolate series, Grandpa's Store, Minister's Guidebook insights from a fellow minister. His column is published weekly in over 600 publications in all 50 states.
The views expressed are those of the author and are not necessarily representative of any other group or organization. We welcome comments and views from our readers. Submit your letters to the editor or commentary on a current event 24/7 to editor@oursentinel.com.
Charlie Kirk assassination legacy, history of assassinated American leaders, free speech and violence in America, political debate versus violence, legacy of voices after tragedy
Fifty-eight admirals and generals, along with 3,600 economists, press leaders to confront climate change with urgency and bipartisan resolve.
byTerry Hansen Guest Commentary
When it comes to climate change, many competing voices can be hard to sort through. But some of the clearest guidance has come from those who know the stakes best.
Fifty-eight former U.S. national security leaders, including 35 admirals and generals, sent a letter on climate change to President Donald Trump during his first term. This extraordinary letter states: “Climate change is real, it is happening now, it is driven by humans, and it is accelerating.” These senior military and national security leaders also assert that “climate change is a direct threat to the national security of the United States,” and that addressing it should be seen “as a threat reduction issue, not a political one.”
Meanwhile, over 3,600 economists, including 28 Nobel Prize-winners and top economic advisers to presidents of both parties, have endorsed a plan to fight climate change. Their “Economists' Statement on Carbon Dividends" advocates putting a consistently rising price on carbon dioxide emissions and returning the money to the American people.
This statement concludes that the price signal will encourage technological innovation and steer our economy toward a low-carbon future. Returning the revenue to households will shield consumers from rising energy prices, and “the majority of families, including the most vulnerable, will benefit financially.” A border carbon adjustment would protect U.S. competitiveness and encourage other nations to adopt their own carbon pricing systems.
When the admirals, generals, and Nobel economists are saying the same thing, the message is simple: act now.
Terry Hansen is a retired educator who writes frequently about climate change. He lives in Milwaukee, WI.
Charlie Kirk’s death echoes America’s tragic history of assassinated leaders, reminding us that violence cannot silence free speech.
Charlie Kirk was a man who had opinions and vocalized them. He believed in free speech. He also believed in the right of free speech for those who disagreed with him. In his Turning Point rallies, he gave untold numbers of people the opportunity to express their opinions and to debate him. He respectfully gave each person the time to state their case on whatever the subject. Charlie was adamant, profound and articulated strong convictions.
Glenn Mollette
Sadly, a deranged 22-year-old man from Utah took Charlie’s life. It has been reported that the gunman had previously stated at a family dinner that he thought Kirk was filled with hate.
When Kirk spoke at a University rally in Utah, the gunman plotted and positioned himself to shoot a single long-range rifle shot that took Kirk’s life. The man ran back to his home where he later had no choice but to confess to his father that he was indeed the man who had been videotaped at the rally who took Charlie Kirk’s life.
The lone assassin is an evil coward who silenced one of America’s star voices. At least he thought he did. Charlie Kirk has become more known and his sound clips have been heard more in the last few days than in his entire ministry/career. Kirk has been propelled by the assassin to a status in American culture that will never be forgotten. Instead of silencing Kirk he magnified Kirk’s voice and message a hundred or more times. Kirk is now being remembered around the world.
It’s one thing to have a hateful, negative thought, but it’s another to allow hate to act itself out in such a way.
Charlie Kirk used his voice. Every American is entitled to this freedom. His voice cost him his life.
Abraham Lincoln gave his life reuniting our country and abolishing slavery. A cowardly assassin took Lincoln’s life as he leisurely watched a play at Ford’s Theatre in Washington, D.C. John F. Kennedy used his voice to excite the American people and to bring about a positive attitude in the country, but was gunned down by an assassin from a hidden window in downtown Dallas, Texas. Martin Luther King, Jr. was a man with a great voice who stirred the hearts of millions of Americans and brought about liberating change for black Americans. An assassin who disagreed with King cowardly hid and took King’s life with a bullet. Malcom X and Bobby Kennedy were orators for positive change in America but someone who disagreed with their views killed them.
The greatest voice of hope, love, change and forgiveness, who ever lived, was Jesus Christ. A cowardly crowd yelled for him to be executed.
These mentioned voices were not silenced by hideous crowds or hidden gunmen. Each of their voices have rung loudly and clearly. Their legacies have only grown bolder and stronger.
It is sad that Charlie Kirk’s assassin did not go down to the rally, stand up like a man and challenge Kirk in a debate. He could have told Kirk what he thought about him and given Kirk a chance to respond. But no, he was a weak, spineless man filled with more hate than probably anyone in America at that given moment.
It’s one thing to have a hateful, negative thought, but it’s another to allow hate to act itself out in such a way.
Violence is never the answer. Let’s keep America free. Free to speak, free to debate, free to practice and express our religion. Let’s have peaceful and strong conversation not assassination.
About the author ~
Glen Mollett is the author of 13 books including Uncommom Sense, the Spiritual Chocolate series, Grandpa's Store, Minister's Guidebook insights from a fellow minister. His column is published weekly in over 600 publications in all 50 states.
The views expressed are those of the author and are not necessarily representative of any other group or organization. We welcome comments and views from our readers. Submit your letters to the editor or commentary on a current event 24/7 to editor@oursentinel.com.
Charlie Kirk assassination legacy, history of assassinated American leaders, free speech and violence in America, political debate versus violence, legacy of voices after tragedy
Witch hunts in India kill thousands of women yearly. Superstition, greed and patriarchy fuel violence despite laws and activism.
Witch Hunt: A Ruthless Venture
Brutality grounded in superstition, social customs and community myths. Witch hunts, an atrocious phenomenon, still prevail across the globe as well as in India. A defamed reality showcasing misogyny cripples women’s individuality. The Human Rights Committee reports the deaths of around 2,500 women every year in the name of witch killings.
Instances of witch hunts have reached alarming levels in several Indian states, including Jharkhand, Assam, Madhya Pradesh, Gujarat, Haryana, Odisha, Chhattisgarh and West Bengal. Among certain communities, the concept of Dayan-pratha (one who practices black magic/witchcraft) traces back to primitive and medieval ages. Following misfortune or disease, some women are tortured, blamed and beaten to death. Usually, the ohja (community doctor) identifies the dayan, also called chudail, either by writing women’s names on the branch of a sal tree—wherever the branch withers marks the accused—or by wrapping slips with names into a bag placed inside an ant nest. The bag consumed by ants is believed to reveal the witch’s name.
These women are labeled a threat. They are assumed to have the “evil eye,” possess supernatural powers, and be destructive to society.
Women as Targets
Witchcraft accusations strike at the heart of women’s status, with the practice largely considered a “feminine affair.” The National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) documented 2,468 murders related to witchcraft between 2001 and 2016. While often cloaked in superstition, most cases stem from economic and psychosocial motives:
Disputes over land and property, often instigated by family members out of greed.
Targeting widows, single women and the elderly.
Manipulation by bhopas (community healers) for selfish gain.
Retaliation after refusal of sexual advances.
Jharkhand, with its large tribal population, records the highest number of witch killings, followed closely by Madhya Pradesh. Average annual murder rates stand at 28.25% in Odisha, 31% in Jharkhand, 16.25% in Madhya Pradesh and 11% in Chhattisgarh.
Notably, even prominent women have been targeted. Debjani Borah, an athlete from Assam, was assaulted and accused of witchcraft. Wiccan priest Ipsita Roy Chakraverti was publicly criticized and branded a witch. Victims are often raped, beaten, stripped, paraded naked, banished from their villages and forced into financial compensation.
Primitive and Modern Dimensions
Witchcraft practices, with roots centuries deep, are found in tribal communities in western Bengal districts and parts of Jharkhand. A village in northeast India, Mayang, is popularly known as the “land of black magic.” Witchcraft is even referenced in the Rig Veda and is studied in some global universities.
Since the beginning of human societies, witchcraft beliefs have deeply impacted indigenous populations.
Paradoxically, witch hunts were also common in Europe during ancient and medieval times. By the mid-1950s, nearly 500 people had been executed as alleged witches. Informal “kangaroo courts” often carried out punishments through mob lynching.
Elsewhere, witch-related violence persists in Tanzania, rural China, parts of Africa and South America. Despite modern science and development, superstition continues to justify violence, transmitted from generation to generation. Victims suffer profound injustice, sorrow and hopelessness.
Sociological and Anthropological Views
Since the beginning of human societies, witchcraft beliefs have deeply impacted indigenous populations. Anthropologists see witch killings as attempts to explain random illness, misfortune and economic hardship. Income shocks and losses often fuel accusations, supporting the “commercial theory.” Competition can lead to labeling and persecution.
Sociologists connect witchcraft beliefs with anti-social behavior, punishing those who resist community norms. Denunciations frequently arise when patriarchal systems attempt to suppress matriarchal traditions.
Legal Measures
Though India lacks a central law specifically addressing witch hunts, several states have enacted legislation:
Odisha Prevention of Witch Hunting Act, 2013
Assam Witch Hunting (Prevention, Prohibition and Protection) Bill, mandating jail terms or life imprisonment
Chhattisgarh Tonahi Pratadna Nivaran Act, 2005
Prevention of Witch Practices (DAAIN) Act, 2001
Bihar Prevention of Witch Hunting Act, 1999
Assam Healing (Prevention of Evil Practices) Act, 2024
Relevant sections of the Indian Penal Code also apply: Section 302 (murder), Section 307 (attempt to murder), Section 376 (rape), and Section 354 (outraging a woman’s modesty).
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights condemns witch hunts as a cruel practice rooted in gender inequality.
Judicial interventions, however, remain inconsistent. In Moyna Murmu v. State of West Bengal, the petitioner was forced from her village. In Tula Devi v. State of Jharkhand, lack of evidence freed the accused. In Gaurav Jain v. State of Bihar, the court directed three assemblies to pass anti-witch-hunting laws.
A senior Guwahati High Court lawyer remarked: “People are illiterate and blinded in thought. Unless we make efforts to enlighten them about the laws and consequences of witch hunts, the practice will continue.”
Global Response
Globally, witch accusations represent severe human rights violations. The United Nations recognized the issue as a humanitarian crisis at its first conference on witch hunts. The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights reported that thousands of women are branded as witches and persecuted annually.
Women unaware of their rights remain vulnerable.
The Australian National University recently hosted a three-day conference addressing witchcraft killings. Amnesty International, the Red Cross and other organizations have campaigned for justice. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights condemns witch hunts as a cruel practice rooted in gender inequality.
Role of Civil Society
Informal organizations have been crucial:
The Witchcraft and Human Rights Network educates communities about laws.
Free Legal Aid in Jharkhand supports enforcement in villages and tribal areas.
ANANDI, a Gujarat-based group, campaigns for outlawing witch hunting.
Pudumi Rabha of Assam has rescued numerous women accused of witchcraft.
Human rights advocates and gender activists continue to fight against this violence.
Education as Change Agent
Education is essential to reform public opinion. Illiteracy fuels mob violence, regressive thought and superstition, especially among tribal populations. Branding women as witches has often been used to justify abuse by religious leaders exploiting the uneducated.
Empowerment and Awareness
Women unaware of their rights remain vulnerable. Legal awareness, uplifting marginalized groups, improving health services and using mass media campaigns can help dismantle witchcraft-related violence.
Witch hunts are not just crimes—they are regressive acts to control women’s autonomy, undermining democracy itself. Specialized anti-witchcraft laws, though important, cannot fully solve problems rooted in irrationality and patriarchy. Grassroots measures—such as empathy, community regulation, police protection and financial support—are essential.
As activist Pudumi Rabha urges: “Don’t be scared. Challenge the offenders and report to the police. The battle is not going to end anytime soon.”
In her spare time, Alphones Deka enjoys travelling to new places, maintaining a personal journal, and watching different series. The thing that brings her the most joy is spending time with my pets and staying in touch with friends.
TAGGED: witch hunts in India today, superstition and gender violence, women's rights and witch killings, tribal witchcraft practices India, legal measures against witch hunts
“Increasing temperatures and changes in precipitation and snowmelt patterns are increasing the severity and size of wildfires in the West.”
byTerry Hansen Guest Commentary
Recently, a group of Republican members of Congress sent a letter to the Canadian government, alleging that its poor forest management practices are responsible for out-of-control wildfires and for this summer's air quality problems in the Midwest and Northeast.
Notably, the letter fails to mention climate change. However, although fire-management practices can play a role in these megafires, climate change also has a profound impact. In the words of Natural Resources Canada:
"Warmer-than-average temperatures, decreased levels of snowpack, low soil moisture and elevated drought conditions are indicators that climate change is impacting the frequency, size and range of wildland fires in Canada. For example, the number of over-wintering fires is increasing."
During the three preceding decades, human-caused climate change doubled the area affected by forest fires in the western United States.
It’s also important to take note of a 2015 issue of the U.S. Forest Service’s journal, Fire Management Today, titled “Climate Change: The Future Is Here.” This publication states, “Increasing temperatures and changes in precipitation and snowmelt patterns are increasing the severity and size of wildfires in the West.” Concern is also expressed about the “occurrence of fire that is outside the range of our existing experience” and the danger this poses to firefighters and communities.
Moreover, a 2016 study in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences concluded that during the three preceding decades, human-caused climate change doubled the area affected by forest fires in the western United States.
The reason is that hotter temperatures evaporate soil moisture and dry vegetation, making it more likely to burn. According to physicist Phillip B. Duffy, "What would have been a fire easily extinguished now just grows very quickly and becomes out of control.”
We are experiencing these impacts before Earth's warming has reached the 1.5°C (2.7°F) threshold climate scientists have long warned about.
In addition, their letter emphasizes, "Our constituents have been limited in their ability to go outside and safely breathe due to the dangerous air quality the wildfire smoke has created."
Significantly, 184 medical and public health groups, including the American Medical Association, the American Heart Association and the American Lung Association, have released a statement declaring: "Climate change is one of the greatest threats to health America has ever faced — it is a true public health emergency."
These organizations cite extreme heat, floods and year-round wildfires, as well as air pollution caused by fossil fuel burning and the spread of mosquito and tick-borne diseases.
Even more troubling, we are experiencing these impacts before Earth's warming has reached the 1.5°C (2.7°F) threshold climate scientists have long warned about. Consider that a recent report by the United Nations concludes that, without a greater commitment to reduce emissions, the Earth will warm by about 3.1° C above pre-industrial levels by 2100. What's more, the increase in global heating is expected to continue beyond the end of the century.
In order to deal with climate-driven threats, we must first recognize them. Urgently reducing greenhouse gas emissions and funding adaptation should be top priorities for every politician who cares about public health and the future we all share.
Terry Hansen is a retired educator who writes frequently about climate change. He lives in Milwaukee.
by Glenn Mollette, Guest Commentator
Artificial Intelligence, AI, is a wonderful tool for research and information. However, I don’t want my deepest relationship to be with a chatbot, chatgpt, robot or anything related to AI.
Glenn Mollette
There is a mega billion-dollar AI movement that is connecting people with their own personal AI bot who will be their dearest and best friend. Someone who cares, who is attentive and fulfills all their conversational needs regardless of the topic. I hope our planet doesn’t become so desperate for companionship that everyone starts spending hours every day talking to “something” that doesn’t really exist but is able to hold a conversation about any topic for hours on end without stopping.
So much of our world already lives in isolation. Millions, perhaps billions of people live in seclusion with their faces continually focused on their phones or tablets. We don’t call people on the telephone or visit them in person like we used to do. Now people can socialize even less as they may find their AI bot, configured to any personality or gender they desire, more interesting than talking to real people.
I am grateful that I have Jesus, my beautiful wife, family and people associated with my work to talk with. I would surely be sad if I felt that I had to turn to something mechanical for conversation.
Japan is already in a sad situation. Over 3000 men have married virtual girlfriends since 2017. One man, reportedly married his robot girlfriend, Gatebox’s Hologram Girl, in 2018. Japan does not recognize these as legal but symbolic marriages. Between now and 2065 Japan’s population is supposed to drop from 128 million to 88 million people.
There are several reasonsfor this including an aging population, low birth rate and limited immigration. A love life that is centered on a virtual character will do nothing to help their dwindling population.
In America our choices are growing. Realbotix robots are supposedly fully interactive and mobile. Lovot is a soft warm robot for emotional connection. Aibo is Sony’s AI-powered robot dog that learns and adapts to owners. Elliq is a robot that keeps elderly users active and engaged. Vector is a small robot that responds to voice commands. Kiki is an AI powered pet robot that recognizes faces. Ami is a caregiving robot that assists with daily activities. Amazon has Astro which is a home monitoring and smart assistant robot. The list goes on. Maybe, you are more interested now in one of these or something different that is certain to come.
The AI market is expected to reach $1.81 trillion by 2030, growing at a rate of 35.9 percent.
Artificial Intelligence is here and we can make it a great tool or allow it to become a negative influence in our lives. It’s kind of like television, pizza and candy bars. A little bit is good but we can overdo it as we can with most anything.
About the author ~
Glen Mollett is the author of 13 books including Uncommom Sense, the Spiritual Chocolate series, Grandpa's Store, Minister's Guidebook insights from a fellow minister. His column is published weekly in over 600 publications in all 50 states.
The views expressed are those of the author and are not necessarily representative of any other group or organization. We welcome comments and views from our readers. Submit your letters to the editor or commentary on a current event 24/7 to editor@oursentinel.com.
I would love to go back to Washington, D.C., and feel like my wife and I could safely stroll the city at 9 or 10 p.m. Actually, I would like to feel like we could safely walk the city at 10 in the morning. I am grateful that President Trump is taking a proactive approach to making D.C. as safe as possible.
In 2024, there were more than 14 million criminal offenses reported in the United States (U.S. crime statistics, Bing.com).
How many cities, towns, or even rural areas do you feel safe in today? My son and I were in New York City a few years back. We toured the Empire State Building, and it was almost 1 a.m. by the time we left and started looking for New York pizza. We walked back to Times Square and, of course, there were still people out, but not that many. There wasn’t a minute I wasn’t constantly looking around and wondering if we were safe. We had a good evening, but it’s aggravating to have to be so concerned.
What town or community in America can we go to and not have to worry? Even in the smallest villages in America, who knows if there is a mentally unstable person out and about looking to do harm? Drunk drivers and drug users are on our roads. Those struggling with mental illness choose unpredictable times to unleash their problems on unsuspecting victims.
From recent events, we know that something bad could happen while shopping at a Target store, sitting in a classroom, worshipping in church, or just walking down the street. No one is immune anywhere in America.
It hasn’t always been this way. I remember being a child when my parents first started locking the doors of our house. There was a time we didn’t even lock them. That was another era. Wouldn’t you love to once again live in a country or community where you felt so safe that you didn’t bother locking your doors? Wouldn’t it be great if you didn’t have to lock them during the day? What if you didn’t have to keep a loaded gun close by or even lock your car?
Wouldn’t that be a wonderful world?
Criminals stole 2,969 cars in D.C. in 2024 and 2,944 cars so far in 2025. This is bad for everyone—the victims, the insurance companies, and the city.
God bless President Trump for trying to make America and D.C. safe again. I pray that God enables him to make every town in America a place where we can feel safe.
About the author ~
Glen Mollett is the author of 13 books including Uncommom Sense, the Spiritual Chocolate series, Grandpa's Store, Minister's Guidebook insights from a fellow minister. His column is published weekly in over 600 publications in all 50 states.
The views expressed are those of the author and are not necessarily representative of any other group or organization. We welcome comments and views from our readers. Submit your letters to the editor or commentary on a current event 24/7 to editor@oursentinel.com.
Martin Luther King Jr., in his courageous opposition to the Vietnam War, warned that "a nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death."
byTerry Hansen Guest Commentary
I recently listened to an incredibly sad interview on Israel's Channel 5 News with the mother of an Israeli soldier who was deployed in Gaza. Representing a group of mothers of members of the Israeli Defense Forces, she explained that after two years of continual trauma, “Today, they are broken, they are finished." She implored that they desperately need time to heal.
The mother went on to describe a paratrooper who had a panic attack "because the smell of food reminded him of corpses being eaten by dogs in Khan Younis." She further testified that “They don’t encounter terrorists; they encounter IEDs and blow up!”
The world's top five arms manufacturers are American companies.
What this distressed mother recounted reminds me of clinical psychiatrist Jonathan Shay's powerful book "Achilles in Vietnam: Combat Trauma and the Undoing of Character." The book is about Vietnam veterans and the psychological and moral wounds of war. Shay wrote that "Time and safety to mourn were built into ancient warfare and were absent in Vietnam."
Added to this is the immense, constant suffering of Palestinians. Psychiatrist Dr. Samah Jabr explains that, for the children of Gaza, the concept of post-traumatic stress disorder is a misnomer. According to Jabr, "there is no 'post' because the trauma is repetitive and ongoing."
Our leaders should be deeply ashamed of the paths they have so often taken to address our world's problems. The U.S. annual defense budget edges toward $1 trillion, while the Trump Administration slashes funding for the U.S. Agency for International Development and other foreign aid programs. Moreover, the world's top five arms manufacturers are American companies.
Martin Luther King Jr., in his courageous opposition to the Vietnam War, warned that "a nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death."
His words ring true today — for Gaza and other conflict zones. Let us choose justice and compassion to break the cycles of violence before future generations are also lost to war.
Terry Hansen is an opinion writer who frequently comments on Gaza, focusing on humanitarian issues, U.S. policy and Israel’s actions in the region. He is a retired educator from Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
Representation, access, and education are key to saving lives. Nurses must lead the charge to end racial gaps in maternal healthcare.
byTeya Mongsaithong
In the U.S., giving birth has become a death sentence for many women of color. In fact, Black/African American mothers are three to four times more likely to die from birth-related complications than white women regardless of socioeconomic status or education level. According to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (2023), the number of preterm births was about 50% higher for Black women (14.6%) than White (9.4%) or Hispanic women (10.1%).
This shocking disparity goes beyond medical issues, it is rooted in implicit bias, structural racism, and gaps in delivering culturally competent care. Without realizing it, even the most compassionate nurses can cause harm. To address this public health crisis, nurse leaders must empower change through standardizing implicit bias training, enhancing community services in high-risk populations, and promoting nurses of color into leadership roles.
Nurse leaders have a responsibility to bridge the gap between underserved communities.
First, implicit bias training should be a national standard across all hospitals. It is important for healthcare providers to confront their assumptions and stereotypes when caring for minorities. Specifically for Black women, there is a misconception that their pain tolerance is higher, and they are “forced to endure pain beyond what [is] considered normal" during labor and delivery.
Delivering culturally competent care in this case is necessary for patients to feel safe to express their needs and highlights the importance of implicit bias training. Nurse leaders can standardize this training through embedding it within onboarding and continuing education requirements. By institutionalizing this training, we can ensure black maternal equity is not optional, but foundational to nursing practice. Beyond education, nurse leaders must also recognize the impact of the barriers to accessing quality care.
Limited access to prenatal and postpartum care is a key factor for poor maternal outcomes. In the U.S., over 35% of counties are considered maternity health deserts, which affects approximately 2.3 million women of reproductive age. To address this, nurse leaders collaborate with organizations to push for policies that would: increase the use of mobile maternity units, incentivize the use of telehealth for obstetrics/gynecologists, midwives, and extend Medicaid coverage for prenatal and postpartum care.
Furthermore, nurse leaders can promote virtual training for nurses to provide telehealth care to increase access for patients with limited transportation means. Nurse leaders have a responsibility to bridge the gap between underserved communities and access to care to ensure mothers of color receive quality and equal treatment. To serve these communities to a higher degree, it is necessary to diversify the workforce.
Representation in healthcare matters deeply. Being able to address the unique needs and experiences of individuals allows mothers to have a more active role in their care. To do this, nurse leaders can create mentorship programs for students, advocate for targeted scholarships, and promote more nurses of color into leadership positions.
Black mothers continue to face disproportionately higher health risks due to systemic bias, neglect, and structural racism.
When underrepresented populations see themselves reflected in authority positions, it enhances trust and promotes cross-cultural care for patients and healthcare professionals alike. Moreover, embracing diversity ensures health care equity for marginalized communities and they “report better health experiences from healthcare practitioners from the same background” . However, many believe that nurse leaders are incapable of leading changes in health outcomes.
It is a misconception that physicians or policy makers hold more power over nurse leaders to drive systemic change. This view underscores the significant role of nurses and their expansive expertise. The role of nursing has evolved into a multifaceted position that not only involves caring for patients, but also educating, advocating, and leading change. Nurses are the most trusted profession, and they are often the first ones to notice when something is “off”. This unique position allows nurses to offer powerful insights during policy decision-making that directly impacts maternal health care.
The racial disparities in maternal mortalities in modern healthcare are unacceptable. Black mothers continue to face disproportionately higher health risks due to systemic bias, neglect, and structural racism that exists in our healthcare system. Nurse leaders must demand policy reform, mandate implicit bias training for all staff, and support diversifying the workforce. With unwavering commitment, nurse leaders can transform the healthcare system to ensure every mother, regardless of race, has an equal opportunity of survival.
Teya Mongsaithong is a nursing student at University of West Florida. After graduation, she plans to pursue Mother Baby or NICU. "I want to be the kind of nurse that patients feel safe around and that they can trust me with their care." When she isn't studying, Mongsaithong loves crocheting stuffed animals - which she sells online, and reading fantasy novels.
Tags: racial disparities in maternal health care, implicit bias training for nurses, Black maternal mortality crisis USA, nurse leadership in healthcare equity, improving care for women of color
Most Americans still tell pollsters immigration is good for their communities and reject cruel deportations, especially those that separate families, target people without criminal records, or penalize people who came here as young children.
byEmily Rodiguez OtherWords
In the 19 years my uncle has worked in the healthcare industry, he’s only missed one day — the day his mother, my grandmother, passed away. He would then help plan a funeral he couldn’t attend.
Photo provided
If you live in his small town in Utah, you know my uncle. He’s the big man you see on a bike riding all over town. He’s part of the kitchen staff at a care facility and a friend to the other workers and patients. He’s the man who has the bus schedule memorized and can get you anywhere.
He’s also the man who was forced to miss his mother’s funeral in his home country. His immigration status requires him to apply for travel authorization, which can take months and puts him at risk of being denied reentry. Unfortunately, it just wasn’t possible for him to make it.
While it’s characterized as temporary, over 200,000 TPS holders have lived here for more than two decades.
Stories like these are all too common. And they could soon get worse.
My uncle has what’s called Temporary Protected Status, or TPS. TPS was created by Congress in 1990 to provide work authorization and protection from deportation to individuals from designated countries enduring armed conflict or environmental disasters.
Over a million people rely on the program. While it’s characterized as temporary, over 200,000 TPS holders have lived here for more than two decades. They’ve established lives here, yet live with the fear that it could be taken away at any moment.
Unfortunately, that moment has arrived.
President Trump and Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem have made it clear that they’re coming for TPS. The administration has carelessly terminated or rescinded the legal status of hundreds of thousands of TPS holders, needlessly uprooting their lives.
These deported TPS holders are now expected to navigate poverty, instability, violence, and other unsafe conditions in countries many haven’t lived in for decades. Many struggle to reintegrate after their return, and are often targeted by local criminal groups.
While the administration slanders TPS holders as criminals, an overwhelming amount of research shows that immigrants actually make our communities safer. They have a nearly 95 percent employment rate and generate over $1.3 billion in federal taxes, contributing to programs like Social Security and Medicare. With a high rate of entrepreneurship, they generate a spending power of more than $8 billion.
Their positive impact is undeniable. Yet instead of providing a pathway to citizenship, the Trump administration is systematically phasing out TPS and imposing significant financial hardship on TPS holders and their communities.
I urge you to defend the rights of your neighbors.
In addition to deeply slashing programs like SNAP to fund tax benefits for the wealthy, Trump and the GOP’s “Big Beautiful Bill” also adds exorbitant new fees for immigrants with TPS, asylum seekers, and migrants on humanitarian parole. The new law increases initial application fees for TPS holders from $50 to $500 and adds a non-waivable $550 fee for work authorization for first-time applicants — along with a new annual renewal fee of at least $275.
My uncle has already paid thousands of dollars in renewal fees during his 20 years as a TPS recipient, saving the money needed from his $16 an hour job to continue to work and provide for his family. Because my uncle loves this country, he’ll pay these predatory fees.
But he shouldn’t have to — and neither should anyone else on TPS. Our communities are better because TPS holders are here. Their livelihoods are in jeopardy unless Congress provides them a pathway to citizenship.
The American Dream and Promise Act would provide TPS holders — along with DACA recipients and other undocumented youth — a pathway to citizenship, along with the permanent relief and stability they and their families deserve.
As the niece of one of the one million-plus TPS holders, I urge you to defend the rights of your neighbors. Now is the time to protect what makes our communities so great.
Emily Rodiguez, a native of Utah, is a recent college graduate who’s pursuing a career in public policy. This op-ed was distributed by OtherWords.org.
"We gather today to bear witness to the past and learn from its awful example, and to make sure that we're not condemned to relive its crimes."
byTerry Hansen Guest Commentary
From 1967 to 1986, Senator William Proxmire (D-WI) gave 3,211 speeches on the Senate floor, tirelessly urging ratification of the United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Crime of Genocide. According to Proxmire:
“This is one senator who believes that ratification is not only patriotic, but also good foreign policy and a moral imperative.”
The U.S. Senate finally ratified the Genocide Convention on February 19, 1986. Subsequently, The Proxmire Act, officially the Genocide Convention Implementation Act of 1987, was signed by President Ronald Reagan on November 4, 1988, making genocide a federal crime.
In his remarks at the signing, Reagan stated: "We gather today to bear witness to the past and learn from its awful example, and to make sure that we're not condemned to relive its crimes."
Near-consensus among Holocaust and genocide scholars that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza
Yet tragically, the United States has often failed to fulfill its obligations under this treaty. In her Pulitzer Prize-winning 2002 book, A Problem from Hell: America and the Age of Genocide, diplomat and government official Samantha Power writes:
"No U.S. President has ever made genocide prevention a priority, and no U.S. President has ever suffered politically for his indifference to its occurrence. It is thus no coincidence that genocide rages on."
Today, there is a near-consensus among Holocaust and genocide scholars that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza.
In the words of Jewish Israeli genocide expert Raz Segal: “Can I name someone whose work I respect who does not think it is genocide? No, there is no counterargument that takes into account all the evidence.”
Segal cites explicit statements of genocidal intent, mass killing of civilians, deliberately destroying life-sustaining conditions, and the systematic targeting of civilian infrastructure.
However, credible evidence of genocide is being met with U.S. denial, UN vetoes, and sanctions against investigators. Our nation is falling short of Senator Proxmire's vision. To fulfill our legal and moral obligations, the United States must lead in defending Palestinians against the crime of genocide.
Terry Hansen is an opinion writer who frequently comments on Gaza, focusing on humanitarian issues, U.S. policy and Israel’s actions in the region. He is a retired educator from Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
All we have for certain, is today. Even today is iffy. Since today is all we really have then it’s best to not mess it up by constantly looking over our shoulders.
by Glenn Mollette, Guest Commentator
Glenn Mollette
Peace and happiness have many variables.
We aren’t happy when we feel we do not have enough and then burdened if we have too much. We fret over not enough money or worry about what we will do if we have too much money. Most of us don’t have the latter problem.
We fret over not enough space or how we care for too much space. We accumulate and store up in our barns and build bigger barns to store up more stuff. We then don’t know what we will do with all the stuff.
How much does it take to bring you peace and make you happy? Can you be happy in a one room dwelling place? Does it take a 25-room house to make you feel good? How many cars do you need to make you feel satisfied? Or, is satisfaction only a remotely impossible concept? Many years ago, one popular song lamented, “I can’t get no satisfaction.”
Satisfaction and happiness may be claimed for a season. Possibly you are satisfied with your vocation, athletic accomplishments, family life, parenting success, fulfillment of life goals and ambitions? Often, we are but then those seasons pass. Careers end, athletic contests become history, retirement comes with memories that fade further and further into the past.
Too often most of us can look back and wonder, “what if?” we may say. The problem with “what if?” is that it doesn’t change anything. If it is in the past, you can’t relive it or change it regardless of how great you were or how bad you were.
All we have for certain, is today. Even today is iffy. Since today is all we really have then it’s best to not mess it up by constantly looking over our shoulders. You can’t go forward always looking back. In the Bible there was a man named Lot. He and his wife were told not to look back at Sodom and Gomera. She did and turned into a pillar of salt. Looking back has a way of doing that to all us as we become immobilized in time.
What does it take to make you happy? Someone to love and someone who loves you? A few family members to care for who also care for you? Enough money to pay the light bill and keep food on the table? Something to do during the day that you enjoy? The only person who can answer these questions are you because only you know what it really takes to make you happy.
Happiness is very much happenstance. Things change every day. Health, sickness, the stock market, families, jobs and hobbies. Friends and loved ones move away or die. Lie is always changing.
God never changes. Happiness may vary throughout the day or week, but your joy and peace that comes with faith in God and focusing on Him is something the world cannot give or take away.
Keep this verse in mind this day regardless of whether you feel happy or if you are down and blue. “You will keep in perfect peace those whose minds are steadfast, because they trust in you.” Isaiah 26:3.
About the author ~
Glen Mollett is the author of 13 books including Uncommom Sense, the Spiritual Chocolate series, Grandpa's Store, Minister's Guidebook insights from a fellow minister. His column is published weekly in over 600 publications in all 50 states.
The views expressed are those of the author and are not necessarily representative of any other group or organization. We welcome comments and views from our readers. Submit your letters to the editor or commentary on a current event 24/7 to editor@oursentinel.com.
by Brea Harris
